Whitey - 12:31 am on Jul 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
@whatson - It makes sense that the thresholds have been moved more favourably. But what those signals could have been has got me perplexed. One thing we do "think we know" is that UI was a factor, and that judging by the very poor standard of some big brands UI, "brand" ran over the top of that threshold.
Brands = authority.
What exactly has Google now taken note of that elevates "borderline" sites into that category I have no idea. Some factors to consider might be:
- the number of times a sites brand name is typed directly into the search
- the number of times searchers respond to an autosuggest result containing the sites brand name
- the relative popularity of those terms above
- the generalised quality of the UI [ e.g. factors 1 -10 ]
- differentiating content features [ no. of unique category titles versus common duplicated titles ]
Really I have absolutely no clue and was hoping for folks to scratch their heads a little and contribute their thoughts. At the end of the day it's pretty academic, and the game-plan for siteowners / SEO's and marketers hasn't changed. Focus on being useful.
On the numbers side, it would be good if folks would be prepared to share some metrics. Sites I look at over a range of languages, industry verticals, and location have increased week on week , by between 50% and at the higher end 350%. The norm appears to be around 150%. NB This roll out probably has 5 or so days to go, and I have no idea of how that will play out.
Given the drop in traffic over the past 2 years or so, I'm wondering if these types of increases provide much respite and incentive for folks to reinvest in their content. SEO is a very unreliable marketing channel - very, very.
And with technology moving so fast and diversely [ e.g. devices , applications - all requiring added resource to support ], Google would have to be wondering if there is enough good quality content to encourage a large enough site owner base to upgrade their content diversity. In my view, Google has to come up with strategies to encourage site-owners to invest in their SEO business, or they simply will have a polarised few. Simply, Google may have been too aggressive and the selection criteria previously used for quality assessment was equally aggressive.
Without diversity, in a fast moving technology driven environment, Google's product of search will lessen in relevancy to alternatives, unless they can come up with significantly improved introduction of good quality, diverse results that are relevant. They need to apply the incentives to respond well amongst the smaller end of town IMO.